Allods Online

Allods Online, a 2010 MMORPG, presents an unusual hardware challenge: the data shows that the combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and the Intel Arc B370 is severely limited by the graphics subsystem, resulting in a combo rank of 2559 out of 2775 tested configurations. The benchmark results indicate that while the CPU is a modern, powerful part, the GPU's performance profile places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, making it the definitive bottleneck across all tested resolutions and settings.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), manufactured on a 4 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor features a substantial cache hierarchy: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 9600X demonstrates strong single-threaded and multi-threaded capabilities. It scores 2183.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 17528.5 in multi-core. In Geekbench, it achieves 2923 single-core and 14438 multi-core. This CPU's average benchmark score is 29713, placing it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within a very tight margin: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE is 0.2% slower, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is 0.5% faster, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is 0.6% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is 0.8% faster.

Given that Allods Online is an MMORPG, its performance can be sensitive to single-threaded performance for game logic and world simulation, while multi-threaded capabilities help with rendering draw calls and background tasks. The data suggests the 9600X is more than adequate for this title. Even at the lowest settings where the GPU is most stressed, the CPU's high single-thread score of 4570 in PassMark should prevent it from becoming a limiting factor. The evidence for this is that the frame rate scales dramatically with resolution and settings, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck rather than a CPU one. If the CPU were the constraint, the frame rates would be more consistent across resolutions at the same settings. The fact that the 9600X sits in the 81st percentile of all CPUs means it is a high-end part that would not be challenged by a 2010-era MMORPG's logic. The CPU's robust performance, with a 3dmark single-thread score of 1253 and a 3dmark max-threads score of 7590, provides ample headroom. The bottleneck is clearly elsewhere, as the maximum achievable frame rates are capped by the GPU's output, not the CPU's processing speed.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary performance bottleneck in this configuration. This integrated GPU (IGP) is based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and is built on a 3 nm process. Its clock speeds are listed with a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. Critically, its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses a portion of the main system RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. Its memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which means it relies on the system's memory bus (89.6 GB/s for the 9600X) and is subject to contention with the CPU. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its theoretical performance is 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16.

The Arc B370's benchmark performance is very low. It has a single benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older, low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 is 0.2% faster, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 is 0.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M is 0.7% faster. The AMD FirePro M2000 is 1.4% slower. This puts the Arc B370 in direct competition with integrated and entry-level discrete graphics solutions from over a decade ago.

This GPU performance deficit explains the measured FPS results perfectly. The GPU is simply not capable of rendering modern or even moderately demanding scenes at high frame rates. The lack of dedicated VRAM is a significant handicap, as the GPU must share the system memory bus with the CPU. The data shows that even at 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 108, which is playable, but the performance collapses as settings increase or resolution scales up. The GPU's low pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are insufficient for the demands of high-resolution gaming. The 3DMark score of 1184, which is nearly identical to a Radeon HD 5770 from 2009, is the clearest indicator that this GPU is not suited for gaming beyond very low graphical demands. The fact that it is an IGP with no dedicated memory makes its performance heavily dependent on the system's memory speed and the CPU's workload, further contributing to its role as the primary limiter.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the system scales across resolutions, confirming the GPU bottleneck. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent with a graphics-limited scenario.

At High settings, the average FPS drops from 53 at 1080p to 34 at 1440p, and finally to 18 at 4K. This represents a 36% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 66% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is nearly linear with the pixel count increase (1080p has ~2.07 million pixels, 1440p has ~3.69 million, and 4K has ~8.29 million). The frame rate at 4K is exactly one-third of the 1080p frame rate, indicating the GPU is working at its absolute limit.

At Low settings, the trend is similar but with higher absolute values. The average FPS drops from 108 at 1080p to 68 at 1440p, and then to 36 at 4K. This is a 37% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 67% drop from 1080p to 4K. The consistency of the percentage drops across settings (roughly 36-37% for 1440p and 66-67% for 4K) is a hallmark of a GPU bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the percentage drops would be much smaller because the CPU's workload does not scale with resolution.

The Ultra settings data shows the most extreme case, with FPS dropping from 34 at 1080p to 21 at 1440p and finally to 11 at 4K. This represents a 38% drop to 1440p and a 68% drop to 4K.

The Medium settings data also includes minimum and maximum FPS values, which further illustrate the GPU's struggle. At 1080p Medium, the average is 85 FPS with a min of 72 and max of 97. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 53 with a min of 45 and max of 61. At 4K Medium, the average is 28 with a min of 24 and max of 32. The low minimum FPS at 4K (24) indicates that the GPU is unable to maintain a smooth frame pacing, resulting in stutter and lag.

The data strongly indicates that the limiting component is the Intel Arc B370. The CPU's performance is not the issue, as the frame rates are directly tied to the GPU's rendering workload. The system is essentially a powerful CPU paired with a weak integrated GPU, and the results reflect this imbalance.

FAQ

Q: Is this system capable of playing Allods Online at 1080p?

A: Yes, at 1080p, the system can achieve playable frame rates. The measured average FPS is 108 at Low settings, 85 at Medium, and 53 at High. At Ultra settings, the average drops to 34 FPS, which may be playable but is not ideal for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the most significant hardware limitation for this game?

A: The Intel Arc B370 GPU is the primary limitation. Its benchmark score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and it performs similarly to the ATI Radeon HD 5770. This results in a severe performance bottleneck that prevents the CPU from reaching its full potential.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X performs nearly identically to its nearest rivals. It is 0.2% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE, 0.5% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H, 0.6% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT, and 0.8% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS. Its average benchmark score is 29713.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: The average frame rate drops from 53 FPS at 1080p to 18 FPS at 4K. This is a 66% reduction in performance, which is directly attributable to the GPU's inability to handle the increased pixel count at 4K.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 9600X a high-performance processor?

A: Yes, the data shows it is a capable processor. It scores 2183.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 17528.5 in multi-core. It is in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29713. Its performance is not a limiting factor in this configuration.

Q: What is the best resolution to play at for a consistent experience?

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p is the only resolution that provides consistently playable frame rates across all settings. Even at 4K Low settings, the average FPS is only 36, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. At 1080p, users can choose between Low (108 FPS), Medium (85 FPS), or High (53 FPS) depending on their preference for visual quality versus frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table presents the exact measured average FPS values for each resolution and settings combination.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 108 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 85 | 72 | 97 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 53 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 34 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 68 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 53 | 45 | 61 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 34 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 21 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 36 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 28 | 24 | 32 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 18 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 11 | - | - |

1080p Analysis: At 1920x1080, the system performs best. The Low preset yields an average of 108 FPS, which is very smooth. The Medium preset provides an average of 85 FPS with a minimum of 72 FPS, ensuring a stable experience. The High preset drops to 53 FPS, which is still playable. The Ultra preset falls to 34 FPS, which may be acceptable for some but is below the standard for fast-paced action.

1440p Analysis: At 2560x1440, the performance becomes more constrained. The Low preset averages 68 FPS, which is decent. The Medium preset averages 53 FPS, with a minimum of 45 FPS. The High preset drops to 34 FPS, which is the same as the 1080p Ultra setting. The Ultra preset is nearly unplayable at 21 FPS.

4K Analysis: At 3840x2160, the system struggles significantly. The Low preset averages 36 FPS, which is not smooth. The Medium preset averages 28 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS. The High preset averages 18 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages only 11 FPS. None of these are acceptable for a playable experience.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired smoothness.

For 1080p (1920x1080): The High preset at 53 FPS offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. It is a significant step up from the Medium preset in terms of graphical quality, and the frame rate is still within a playable range. If a higher frame rate is preferred, the Medium preset at 85 FPS (min 72, max 97) provides a very smooth experience with a minimum frame rate that never dips below the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 108 FPS is exceptionally smooth but sacrifices most graphical features. The Ultra preset at 34 FPS is not recommended, as the frame rate dips below the level needed for consistent camera control and combat.

For 1440p (2560x1440): The Low preset at 68 FPS is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth experience at this resolution. The Medium preset at 53 FPS is borderline, and its minimum of 45 FPS may cause noticeable stutter. The High preset at 34 FPS is not recommended for active gameplay. The Ultra preset at 21 FPS is unplayable.

For 4K (3840x2160): None of the presets provide a playable experience. The Low preset at 36 FPS is the highest achievable, but it is still too low for a smooth experience. The Medium preset at 28 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 11 FPS are all well below acceptable levels. This resolution should be avoided with this hardware configuration.

Overall Verdict: The best experience is achieved at 1080p with the High preset, yielding 53 FPS. This provides a good visual presentation without compromising the playability of the game. For users who prioritize a high and stable frame rate, 1080p Medium at 85 FPS (min 72) is the safest choice. The data clearly shows that the Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor, and users should target 1080p to get the most out of this system. The CPU's capabilities are underutilized due to the GPU's performance, so lowering graphical settings is the most effective way to improve performance.